(1.) This revision petition is directed against the order dtd. 7/12/2021 passed in I.A.No.219 of 2020 in O.S.No.97 of 2019 on the file of the learned Senior Civil Judge at Suryapet, whereby the trial Court dismissed the application filed by the petitioner seeking rejection of the plaint. Dissatisfied with the same, the petitioner filed this revision petition.
(2.) The petitioner herein is the first defendant and the respondents herein are the plaintiffs in the suit.
(3.) The respondents-plaintiffs herein filed suit O.S.No.97 of 2019 seeking to declare them as absolute owners and possessors of the suit schedule property, to grant perpetual injunction and to direct the defendant Nos.2 to 4 to rectify the entries in all the revenue records. During the pendency of the suit, even before filing of the written statement by the defendants, an application is filed for rejection of the plaint under Order 7 Rule 11(d) CPC read with Article 58 of the Limitation Act by the first defendant stating that the suit is barred by limitation on the ground that (a) as the plaintiffs filed suit based on gift deed Nos.5254 of 1992 and 5255 of 1992 dtd. 1/11/1992 when revenue records reflected the name of the first defendant and the same is very much is known to the plaintiffs through such entries in revenue records suit should have been filed within the limitation period, (b) in para 8 of the plaint the plaintiffs asserted that the first defendant illegally managed the revenue authorities to get his name entered in the revenue records in 1976-77 till 2003 and as such the cause of action to file the suit for declaration of title arose for either plaintiffs or to their donors and the limitation ends by 1979, and (c) as per para 8 of plaint when the second defendant after conducting denovo enquiry advised the parties to approach civil Court vide Lr.No.B/1366/2014 dtd. 29/2/2016 and thus, the cause of action for plaintiffs starts from then and it is to be filed on 26/6/2019 and therefore it is clearly beyond limitation.